In June this year, they certainly didn't have any compliant signage. Which part of the car park did you park in? The bit right in front of the cleaners or the bit to the left?
looks like a pay to park car park for the cleaners (biggest dry cleaners I've ever seen)
it i snotfor cleaners customers only, it was just a car park, I think.
-I went to cleaner, it is at the car park, to ask directions.
-I did not come back, everything happenedwithin thoes 11 min.I was in that car park fro 11 min,
so when you said you had to return at 1 or 2 and pay again. what you meant was. because of that you decided not to Park??
It was confusing and any way because of the passengers I decided to go elswhere,after speaking with the Laundrette assitance,who advised about other places. Also, I did not see any disabeled parking.
The question was:
-I went to cleaner, it is at the car park, to ask directions.
-I did not come back, everything happenedwithin thoes 11 min.I was in that car park fro 11 min,
so when you said you had to return at 1 or 2 and pay again. what you meant was. because of that you decided not to Park??
We are trying to help but you don't appear to be reading or understanding the questions.
no, i have not returned back, it was on the display: Saturday it had different tariff, before lunch and after lunch.
I do read questions, but what i said in my 1st post: it happenend within those 11 min (the only entrance I had to that parking)and we left,after reading the display and taking directions from the cleaners assistance. As i epxlained I was not familiar with the town and needed some advice.
What time was the alleged breach of contract by the driver? It will say on the NtK which you still haven't shown us.
Sorry I might appear not paying attention, probably because I know what happenend and assume others would undertand my explanation. Or probably i could not describe it clear for others.
What time was the alleged breach of contract by the driver? It will say on the NtK which you still haven't shown us.
i have posted a link to the letter at 10:42.
shall I re-post it ?
Based on what we know from your opening post, and this is purely an attempt to get a full understanding of the actual event and what the allegation that has been made against the driver or the keeper, in order to try and assist you:
Events:
1.Travelled from London to Stratford upon Avon with x2 elderly and x1 who had mild disability. (irrelevant at this time)
2.Stopped at the Smart Parking, had to park in a bay, because the drive was narrow, so I did not want to block other cars.(relevant)
3.passengers got out, to stretch legs, while I wanted to ask for directions.(irrelevant at this time)
4. Went to cleaners, that was at the car park, then with passengers drove out.(irrelevant at this time)
5.Had to wait to get out of car park because of traffic.(relevant)
6.You can see that I was at the exit at 11 min after entering the parking.(no we can't because you haven't shown us the NtK so we can't "see" anything)
7.All of it was due to not knowing the area.(irrelevant)
8.I asked for footage to show that i did not use cleaners, went in and out of the cleaners in couple of minutes.(irrelevant and any "footage" would not prove anything that has any relevance either)
9.There was not any disability bay anyway, car park was busy, and I also read the parking rules, that was inconvenient for us, as I had to return around 1 or 2 pm to pay again. Different rules after lunch. (Shocking grammar and makes no sense so no idea if relevant or not)
10.With x2 elderly, slow walkers and 1 mild disability person I could not do that.(Could not do what? "that" means nothing to us)
11.The email reply says that it would take 28 day for them to reply, but it would mean that 14 days of discount would be up.(what "email"? Do you mean your appeal? If so, then say exactly that.)
12.Received the letter on 5th Oct, has been waiting for the footage.77(What "letter". Makes no sense to anyone reading this. Has the "letter" been waiting for "the footage"? Sounds like it based on the way you've explained it)
13.I have attached images, but they are not clear. It is on google map.(you didn't attach any images (of what?))
14,So,shall I appeal now, I have couple of day of 14 days left.(You have 14 days let to do what? You have already appealed by the sound of it)
thank you
OK. So you've shown us the NtK and it is not PoFA compliant although it pretends to be. That is only useful if the driver has not been identified.
At this point, I'm assuming you are the registered keeper of the vehicle and the NtK is addressed to you, the keeper. If not, please clarify your relationship to this situation.
You need to understand a couple of things first... assuming you are the keeper of the vehicle and the NtK is addressed to you, then you are the "Keeper", which is a legal entity. There is another separate legal entity... the "Driver".
So, for the time being, Smart Parking have no idea who the "driver" is so they have sent out an NtK to the "keeper", who they know is you because they got your data from the DVLA because the car is registered to you, the "Keeper".
So, a person can be either the "keeper" the "driver" or "both". Smart Parking only know the identity of the "keeper". However, it is the "driver" who is liable for the alleged breach of contract with Smart. The only way they can recover the charge if they do not know the identity of the "drive", is if they fully comply with all the requirements of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA).
As their NtK is not fully compliant with PoFA, they cannot hold the "keeper" liable if they don't know the identity of the "driver". However, if the "keeper" has blabbed, inadvertently or otherwise, that they were also the "driver", then the fact that their NtK I not PoFA compliant goes out the window.
If the "keeper" has not identified the "driver" and there is no legal obligation for the "keeper" to do so, then Smart have no wriggle room and can only pursue the "driver", who, if they have not been told, they have no idea who that is. Catch-22 for Smart (not so).
So, from what we can glean from what you have told us so far and looking at what appears to be an appeal where you said (as the "keeper") "I moved my car to a parking space in order not to block your narrow driveway for other cars...", you have inadvertently admitted to also being the "driver". If you'd said "The driver moved the car to a parking space...", the drivers identity would not have been revealed.
So, when you talk about an "appeal", are you referring to the POPLA appeal? If so, what is the date on the rejection letter from the initial appeal you appear to have made and included a POPLA code?
answers to questions:
1.I parked on a bay in order not to block other cars, while i inquired directions. I wanted to read and understand parking rules on that park, asked questions about parking places closer to our destination. I did not want to park on that park.
I have mentioned parking on a bay to avoid any accusation that i intended to park there.
2. After speaking to the cleaner’s assistance we left the parking, in the car, and never returned back.
3.About the image, I had struggled to post the image of the letter initially (sorry that I stated it before time).I have attached NTK late ron.
4.Reply from car parking office was on my email asking for a footage (questions 8.11).
5.About disability parking bay: can I appeal based on that car parking not having a disability bay?
6. on 5 oct I received the NTK letter, 10 days after the alleged contravenes. So, I have couple of days to appeal, until 14 days of discount runs out.
7.Thank you for grammar lesson, I’ll try to improve.
8.I am both:keeper and driver.
Agree x 1
View List